As regards the comparison with Vandoorne, the point is simply that if two races are too early to judge him on, then why are they enough to condemn Kimi?

I'm not sure most have just the two races in mind Zoue. More likely his entire stint at Ferrari, which is into its fourth season now. 2014 and 2015 were weak for him, 2017 is starting out weak, and 2016...

Well as for 2016, I'm a Vettel fan but I don't think last year was Vettel at his best, and he had quite a bit of mechanical and strategical gremlins too. All in all last year I don't think Kimi was necessarily good but Vettel not as good as in 2015 or currently or Alonso in 2014.

You'll get no argument from me about Vettel being better. But 2016 wasn't a bad stint, or else Kimi wouldn't have been extended in the first place. This year he's had two lacklustre performances, which IMO both stem from setup issues. He absolutely needs to get on top of that but it's way too early to conclude he's past it from the small sample we've had so far

In fairness to Kimi, losing out on Friday practice really hurt him in China.

Yes, I'd agree. I don't think it's much of an excuse, though, as everyone is in the same boat. He really needs to get himself sorted this weekend and if he does I'm fairly convinced he can keep up with Vettel

As regards the comparison with Vandoorne, the point is simply that if two races are too early to judge him on, then why are they enough to condemn Kimi?

I'm not sure most have just the two races in mind Zoue. More likely his entire stint at Ferrari, which is into its fourth season now. 2014 and 2015 were weak for him, 2017 is starting out weak, and 2016...

Well as for 2016, I'm a Vettel fan but I don't think last year was Vettel at his best, and he had quite a bit of mechanical and strategical gremlins too. All in all last year I don't think Kimi was necessarily good but Vettel not as good as in 2015 or currently or Alonso in 2014.

You'll get no argument from me about Vettel being better. But 2016 wasn't a bad stint, or else Kimi wouldn't have been extended in the first place. This year he's had two lacklustre performances, which IMO both stem from setup issues. He absolutely needs to get on top of that but it's way too early to conclude he's past it from the small sample we've had so far

BIB: not sure why you say that, 2014 and 2015 were pretty bad for him as well and he got an extension?

As regards the comparison with Vandoorne, the point is simply that if two races are too early to judge him on, then why are they enough to condemn Kimi?

I'm not sure most have just the two races in mind Zoue. More likely his entire stint at Ferrari, which is into its fourth season now. 2014 and 2015 were weak for him, 2017 is starting out weak, and 2016...

Well as for 2016, I'm a Vettel fan but I don't think last year was Vettel at his best, and he had quite a bit of mechanical and strategical gremlins too. All in all last year I don't think Kimi was necessarily good but Vettel not as good as in 2015 or currently or Alonso in 2014.

You'll get no argument from me about Vettel being better. But 2016 wasn't a bad stint, or else Kimi wouldn't have been extended in the first place. This year he's had two lacklustre performances, which IMO both stem from setup issues. He absolutely needs to get on top of that but it's way too early to conclude he's past it from the small sample we've had so far

BIB: not sure why you say that, 2014 and 2015 were pretty bad for him as well and he got an extension?

Trying to remember now but I don't think 2015 was terrible, just that his qualifying was and he ended up having to play catch up most Sundays. His race performances weren't bad on the whole and I seem to recall that they felt if they could address his Saturday issues he'd do better. Which he did, as it turned out.

I was thinking just what Zoue was. This is just 2 races. Most drivers have one or 2 races in a season where they under perform. There is a small chance that this could be it and he'll be much stronger in all the others. I don't think that will be the case. But it is far too soon to decide anything about his future based on just 2 races.

It's not just two races, though - it's these two races on top of the form he's been showing for quite a while now - and apparently Ferrari doesn't think it's too soon to talk about his future. If his actual employers are ready to discuss his future with the team, why can't we?

Agreed. 2014 and 2015 were both really poor, 2016 was ok, but far from great.

It's been two races. Two. No, he hasn't performed well, but it's still two races. Alonso's making Vandoorne look ordinary but I don't think we should be calling for his head, either.

If he carries on the way he's been doing, then of course it's a no-brainer. He's clearly not getting anywhere near the best out of the car and he's letting the team down. But people have very short memories in F1 and if he pulls it out of the bag in the next couple of races his poor start will be forgotten. You may as well pick lottery numbers as determine which way it's going to go after two races.

Quote:

Remember, this isn't just an open invitation to bash Kimi! Be constructive, please!

Yeah, good luck with that one...

So you are comparing a driver that's been in F1 for 16 years with a driver that's done only 3 races in a car that's been unreliable?

Basic facts about 2016 are that in close to equal cars Kimi was inferior to Vettel, Ricciardo and Verstappen, this year thus far in close to equal cars he has been inferior speed wise to Bottas.

Ah, well, if we are going to be talking basic facts then the basic fact is that until Japan the only driver out of that quartet doing better than him was Ricciardo, and it's very arguable that the Red Bull was a better car than the Ferrari at that point. In the USA, of course, despite qualifying ahead of Vettel (yet again), Kimi's race was compromised by a loose wheel and he was forced to retire. That's when he fell behind Vettel. Now while I'd agree that Vettel was better than him during the races - although certainly not in qualifying - Kimi wasn't exactly poor overall. He finished 6th in the 3rd best car, so all in all didn't disgrace himself by any means.

This year Kimi has been poor, no argument there. But I'll go back to my argument that two races is way too early to start talking about replacing him and I often get the feeling that people are just waiting for him to trip just so that can trot out the same old line. It's just a wonder no-one's mentioned ice-cream, yet.

As regards the comparison with Vandoorne, the point is simply that if two races are too early to judge him on, then why are they enough to condemn Kimi? You and I have debated before on how much leeway rookies should have in F1, so my position should come as no surprise to you and it's not as though I'm being inconsistent. Two races is too early, period. Let's keep the vultures away for a respectable time at least

There has been talk about Kimi's level of performance since 2014 not the last 2 races, the Ferrari over the season was the equal of the Red Bull, Vettel could have finished 3rd in the WDC if not for bad luck, Kimi finished 6th and I would say that was his level of performance, nearly every race you would be predicting him to finish 6th whereas with Vettel often you would be fancying him for the podium.

Yes Vandoorne is a rookie plus he is in a car that has issues of performance and reliability and questions whether he has the same car as Alonso, how can we be saying that Kimi is a 2 race rookie?

It's been two races. Two. No, he hasn't performed well, but it's still two races. Alonso's making Vandoorne look ordinary but I don't think we should be calling for his head, either.

If he carries on the way he's been doing, then of course it's a no-brainer. He's clearly not getting anywhere near the best out of the car and he's letting the team down. But people have very short memories in F1 and if he pulls it out of the bag in the next couple of races his poor start will be forgotten. You may as well pick lottery numbers as determine which way it's going to go after two races.

Quote:

Remember, this isn't just an open invitation to bash Kimi! Be constructive, please!

Yeah, good luck with that one...

So you are comparing a driver that's been in F1 for 16 years with a driver that's done only 3 races in a car that's been unreliable?

Basic facts about 2016 are that in close to equal cars Kimi was inferior to Vettel, Ricciardo and Verstappen, this year thus far in close to equal cars he has been inferior speed wise to Bottas.

Ah, well, if we are going to be talking basic facts then the basic fact is that until Japan the only driver out of that quartet doing better than him was Ricciardo, and it's very arguable that the Red Bull was a better car than the Ferrari at that point. In the USA, of course, despite qualifying ahead of Vettel (yet again), Kimi's race was compromised by a loose wheel and he was forced to retire. That's when he fell behind Vettel. Now while I'd agree that Vettel was better than him during the races - although certainly not in qualifying - Kimi wasn't exactly poor overall. He finished 6th in the 3rd best car, so all in all didn't disgrace himself by any means.

This year Kimi has been poor, no argument there. But I'll go back to my argument that two races is way too early to start talking about replacing him and I often get the feeling that people are just waiting for him to trip just so that can trot out the same old line. It's just a wonder no-one's mentioned ice-cream, yet.

As regards the comparison with Vandoorne, the point is simply that if two races are too early to judge him on, then why are they enough to condemn Kimi? You and I have debated before on how much leeway rookies should have in F1, so my position should come as no surprise to you and it's not as though I'm being inconsistent. Two races is too early, period. Let's keep the vultures away for a respectable time at least

There has been talk about Kimi's level of performance since 2014 not the last 2 races, the Ferrari over the season was the equal of the Red Bull, Vettel could have finished 3rd in the WDC if not for bad luck, Kimi finished 6th and I would say that was his level of performance, nearly every race you would be predicting him to finish 6th whereas with Vettel often you would be fancying him for the podium.

Yes Vandoorne is a rookie plus he is in a car that has issues of performance and reliability and questions whether he has the same car as Alonso, how can we be saying that Kimi is a 2 race rookie?

I wonder if you actually watched last season? Since the above is simply not true. Before Japan, just four races from the end of the season and where he was 4th in the WDC, Kimi finished lower than 5th on exactly four occasions, so to claim that 6th was somehow his default position is just nonsense. In fact, he finished 4th or higher more often than not. And, while the Ferrari started stronger, the Red Bull definitely overtook them and by the half-way mark were the stronger car. Kimi did finish 6th a couple of times after Japan, but by that time of course the Ferrari was struggling.

There are no questions as to whether Vandoorne has the same car. See above

History has shown that Ferrari are quite happy to run a #1 and #2 driver system, we saw this in the Schumacher years, they kept Irvine until he decided to leave, Barrichello until he decided to leave, they finally got rid of Massa but he had been there for 8 years.

The only time we actually saw equality was when Kimi and Massa were paired together but that was a case of the #1 driver not being able beat the #2 driver, this was because the tier 1 driver they thought they had signed was actually a tier 2 driver.

So all that being said they might keep Kimi because they're not going to be looking to pair Vettel up with a tier 1 driver plus Vettel likes Kimi and I don't believe they will be looking to upset Vettel.

I'd agree that as long as Kimi manages to help them fight for the WCC and doesn't cost them materially in points then they will likely look to keep him. As you say, they won't want to upset Vettel too much and the pairing works well together. But Kimi still has to deliver and do better than he has done so far.

It's exactly the same at Mercedes, in fact. They took Bottas on to be a non-threatening number two to Lewis and, as long as he doesn't drop points necessarily (and maintain the harmony with Lewis), they'll keep him over more promising tier 1 options like e.g. Alonso. But, like Kimi, Bottas still has to deliver and help them secure the WCC. If he doesn't, then he'll be out, too.

It's uncanny how similar the two top teams are, tbh. Both have a favourite driver, which is especially clear when you hear how the management talk about them, and both have a Number Two Finn who's on the naughty step and will be fighting for his career this year. RBR appear to be the only (potential) front runner happy to have two alpha drivers. And neither of them are Finns

I think you are wrong about Mercedes, all the tier 1 drivers were under contract so they basically signed the best driver available that also made some commercial sense, let's not forget that even Bottas was bought out of his contract, there were cheaper drivers available like Wehrlein if they didn't want Hamilton challenged as such.

Also Bottas is on a 1 year contract which talks of perform or else, or if a tier 1 driver becomes available, Vettel, then you're out, whereas Ferrari have a history of re-signing under performing drivers, Kimi 2014 and 2015 being a prime example.

I think it's exactly the same. Having a number two is not the same as having a weak driver. Bottas is strong enough to be a backup to Lewis and gain valuable WCC points, while not bringing the management headaches that a true tier 1 driver would bring. Toto pretty much said as much. He's on a 1-year contract - reportedly - because he hasn't really proven himself in a top team yet and because Wehrlein was considered too volatile and not quite ready. If they were that convinced he was the Next Best Thing, they would have signed him on a multi-year deal.

Like Bottas, Kimi is considered a good driver who won't challenge Vettel too much. He's also on a one year contract, don't forget, so if keeping Vettel happy was the sole consideration than why not give him a longer deal? It's because they are not entirely confident of his performance. A bit like Mercedes with Bottas. If Kimi doesn't perform, he'll be out. As will Bottas at Mercedes.

You don't know that Mercedes would not sign a tier 1 driver because there wasn't one available, I personally believe that if Vettel wanted to go to Mercedes next year then they would sign him, one of the clinches is with him being a German 4 time WDC, this being much the same reasoning behind signing Schumacher in 2010.

Again with Kimi he didn't perform in either 2014 or 2015 yet Ferrari re-signed him, also part of the reasoning behind the 1 year contracts for Kimi might also be his age, this is a policy that football clubs also tend to operate with older players.

As regards the comparison with Vandoorne, the point is simply that if two races are too early to judge him on, then why are they enough to condemn Kimi?

I'm not sure most have just the two races in mind Zoue. More likely his entire stint at Ferrari, which is into its fourth season now. 2014 and 2015 were weak for him, 2017 is starting out weak, and 2016...

Well as for 2016, I'm a Vettel fan but I don't think last year was Vettel at his best, and he had quite a bit of mechanical and strategical gremlins too. All in all last year I don't think Kimi was necessarily good but Vettel not as good as in 2015 or currently or Alonso in 2014.

You'll get no argument from me about Vettel being better. But 2016 wasn't a bad stint, or else Kimi wouldn't have been extended in the first place. This year he's had two lacklustre performances, which IMO both stem from setup issues. He absolutely needs to get on top of that but it's way too early to conclude he's past it from the small sample we've had so far

BIB: not sure why you say that, 2014 and 2015 were pretty bad for him as well and he got an extension?

Trying to remember now but I don't think 2015 was terrible, just that his qualifying was and he ended up having to play catch up most Sundays. His race performances weren't bad on the whole and I seem to recall that they felt if they could address his Saturday issues he'd do better. Which he did, as it turned out.

I'm reasonably sure 2014 was a two year deal?

Even when he started beating Vettel in qualifying in the second half of the 2016 season, Vettel was still beating him in the races.

History has shown that Ferrari are quite happy to run a #1 and #2 driver system, we saw this in the Schumacher years, they kept Irvine until he decided to leave, Barrichello until he decided to leave, they finally got rid of Massa but he had been there for 8 years.

The only time we actually saw equality was when Kimi and Massa were paired together but that was a case of the #1 driver not being able beat the #2 driver, this was because the tier 1 driver they thought they had signed was actually a tier 2 driver.

So all that being said they might keep Kimi because they're not going to be looking to pair Vettel up with a tier 1 driver plus Vettel likes Kimi and I don't believe they will be looking to upset Vettel.

I'd agree that as long as Kimi manages to help them fight for the WCC and doesn't cost them materially in points then they will likely look to keep him. As you say, they won't want to upset Vettel too much and the pairing works well together. But Kimi still has to deliver and do better than he has done so far.

It's exactly the same at Mercedes, in fact. They took Bottas on to be a non-threatening number two to Lewis and, as long as he doesn't drop points necessarily (and maintain the harmony with Lewis), they'll keep him over more promising tier 1 options like e.g. Alonso. But, like Kimi, Bottas still has to deliver and help them secure the WCC. If he doesn't, then he'll be out, too.

It's uncanny how similar the two top teams are, tbh. Both have a favourite driver, which is especially clear when you hear how the management talk about them, and both have a Number Two Finn who's on the naughty step and will be fighting for his career this year. RBR appear to be the only (potential) front runner happy to have two alpha drivers. And neither of them are Finns

I think you are wrong about Mercedes, all the tier 1 drivers were under contract so they basically signed the best driver available that also made some commercial sense, let's not forget that even Bottas was bought out of his contract, there were cheaper drivers available like Wehrlein if they didn't want Hamilton challenged as such.

Also Bottas is on a 1 year contract which talks of perform or else, or if a tier 1 driver becomes available, Vettel, then you're out, whereas Ferrari have a history of re-signing under performing drivers, Kimi 2014 and 2015 being a prime example.

I think it's exactly the same. Having a number two is not the same as having a weak driver. Bottas is strong enough to be a backup to Lewis and gain valuable WCC points, while not bringing the management headaches that a true tier 1 driver would bring. Toto pretty much said as much. He's on a 1-year contract - reportedly - because he hasn't really proven himself in a top team yet and because Wehrlein was considered too volatile and not quite ready. If they were that convinced he was the Next Best Thing, they would have signed him on a multi-year deal.

Like Bottas, Kimi is considered a good driver who won't challenge Vettel too much. He's also on a one year contract, don't forget, so if keeping Vettel happy was the sole consideration than why not give him a longer deal? It's because they are not entirely confident of his performance. A bit like Mercedes with Bottas. If Kimi doesn't perform, he'll be out. As will Bottas at Mercedes.

You don't know that Mercedes would not sign a tier 1 driver because there wasn't one available, I personally believe that if Vettel wanted to go to Mercedes next year then they would sign him, one of the clinches is with him being a German 4 time WDC, this being much the same reasoning behind signing Schumacher in 2010.

Again with Kimi he didn't perform in either 2014 or 2015 yet Ferrari re-signed him, also part of the reasoning behind the 1 year contracts for Kimi might also be his age, this is a policy that football clubs also tend to operate with older players.

And yet you do know that Ferrari wouldn't? I sense a double standard here.

There's nothing to suggest that Ferrari and McLaren are operating a different driver policy. Both have a "main" driver, and both have a solid 2nd.

I'm not sure most have just the two races in mind Zoue. More likely his entire stint at Ferrari, which is into its fourth season now. 2014 and 2015 were weak for him, 2017 is starting out weak, and 2016...

Well as for 2016, I'm a Vettel fan but I don't think last year was Vettel at his best, and he had quite a bit of mechanical and strategical gremlins too. All in all last year I don't think Kimi was necessarily good but Vettel not as good as in 2015 or currently or Alonso in 2014.

You'll get no argument from me about Vettel being better. But 2016 wasn't a bad stint, or else Kimi wouldn't have been extended in the first place. This year he's had two lacklustre performances, which IMO both stem from setup issues. He absolutely needs to get on top of that but it's way too early to conclude he's past it from the small sample we've had so far

BIB: not sure why you say that, 2014 and 2015 were pretty bad for him as well and he got an extension?

Trying to remember now but I don't think 2015 was terrible, just that his qualifying was and he ended up having to play catch up most Sundays. His race performances weren't bad on the whole and I seem to recall that they felt if they could address his Saturday issues he'd do better. Which he did, as it turned out.

I'm reasonably sure 2014 was a two year deal?

Even when he started beating Vettel in qualifying in the second half of the 2016 season, Vettel was still beating him in the races.

Yep, because Vettel's better? Did you miss the post above where I said - and I quote - "You'll get no argument from me about Vettel being better." That doesn't mean that Kimi was bad.

Here's a wild thought. Imagine Kimi's performance remains this bad or worse as the season progresses and it really starts to hurt Ferrari in both championships. Do you think they would go to Giovanassi? Lol I can't imagine that but it would be quite dramatic wouldn't it?

So you are comparing a driver that's been in F1 for 16 years with a driver that's done only 3 races in a car that's been unreliable?

Basic facts about 2016 are that in close to equal cars Kimi was inferior to Vettel, Ricciardo and Verstappen, this year thus far in close to equal cars he has been inferior speed wise to Bottas.

Ah, well, if we are going to be talking basic facts then the basic fact is that until Japan the only driver out of that quartet doing better than him was Ricciardo, and it's very arguable that the Red Bull was a better car than the Ferrari at that point. In the USA, of course, despite qualifying ahead of Vettel (yet again), Kimi's race was compromised by a loose wheel and he was forced to retire. That's when he fell behind Vettel. Now while I'd agree that Vettel was better than him during the races - although certainly not in qualifying - Kimi wasn't exactly poor overall. He finished 6th in the 3rd best car, so all in all didn't disgrace himself by any means.

This year Kimi has been poor, no argument there. But I'll go back to my argument that two races is way too early to start talking about replacing him and I often get the feeling that people are just waiting for him to trip just so that can trot out the same old line. It's just a wonder no-one's mentioned ice-cream, yet.

As regards the comparison with Vandoorne, the point is simply that if two races are too early to judge him on, then why are they enough to condemn Kimi? You and I have debated before on how much leeway rookies should have in F1, so my position should come as no surprise to you and it's not as though I'm being inconsistent. Two races is too early, period. Let's keep the vultures away for a respectable time at least

There has been talk about Kimi's level of performance since 2014 not the last 2 races, the Ferrari over the season was the equal of the Red Bull, Vettel could have finished 3rd in the WDC if not for bad luck, Kimi finished 6th and I would say that was his level of performance, nearly every race you would be predicting him to finish 6th whereas with Vettel often you would be fancying him for the podium.

Yes Vandoorne is a rookie plus he is in a car that has issues of performance and reliability and questions whether he has the same car as Alonso, how can we be saying that Kimi is a 2 race rookie?

I wonder if you actually watched last season? Since the above is simply not true. Before Japan, just four races from the end of the season and where he was 4th in the WDC, Kimi finished lower than 5th on exactly four occasions, so to claim that 6th was somehow his default position is just nonsense. In fact, he finished 4th or higher more often than not. And, while the Ferrari started stronger, the Red Bull definitely overtook them and by the half-way mark were the stronger car. Kimi did finish 6th a couple of times after Japan, but by that time of course the Ferrari was struggling.

There are no questions as to whether Vandoorne has the same car. See above

He would often finish 4th or 5th when other drivers had issues, not often on pure performance, sometimes Red Bull were off the pace, you tend to notice this things in the competition I take part in. If I was unsure which car would be quicker between Ferrari and Red Bull then I would place Kimi 6th, to do this just because I have anything personally against Kimi would be sort of chopping my nose off to spite my face, so it shows that is a genuine opinion.

Actually being in the competition helps to keep you sharp about relative driver performance.

I'd agree that as long as Kimi manages to help them fight for the WCC and doesn't cost them materially in points then they will likely look to keep him. As you say, they won't want to upset Vettel too much and the pairing works well together. But Kimi still has to deliver and do better than he has done so far.

It's exactly the same at Mercedes, in fact. They took Bottas on to be a non-threatening number two to Lewis and, as long as he doesn't drop points necessarily (and maintain the harmony with Lewis), they'll keep him over more promising tier 1 options like e.g. Alonso. But, like Kimi, Bottas still has to deliver and help them secure the WCC. If he doesn't, then he'll be out, too.

It's uncanny how similar the two top teams are, tbh. Both have a favourite driver, which is especially clear when you hear how the management talk about them, and both have a Number Two Finn who's on the naughty step and will be fighting for his career this year. RBR appear to be the only (potential) front runner happy to have two alpha drivers. And neither of them are Finns

I think you are wrong about Mercedes, all the tier 1 drivers were under contract so they basically signed the best driver available that also made some commercial sense, let's not forget that even Bottas was bought out of his contract, there were cheaper drivers available like Wehrlein if they didn't want Hamilton challenged as such.

Also Bottas is on a 1 year contract which talks of perform or else, or if a tier 1 driver becomes available, Vettel, then you're out, whereas Ferrari have a history of re-signing under performing drivers, Kimi 2014 and 2015 being a prime example.

I think it's exactly the same. Having a number two is not the same as having a weak driver. Bottas is strong enough to be a backup to Lewis and gain valuable WCC points, while not bringing the management headaches that a true tier 1 driver would bring. Toto pretty much said as much. He's on a 1-year contract - reportedly - because he hasn't really proven himself in a top team yet and because Wehrlein was considered too volatile and not quite ready. If they were that convinced he was the Next Best Thing, they would have signed him on a multi-year deal.

Like Bottas, Kimi is considered a good driver who won't challenge Vettel too much. He's also on a one year contract, don't forget, so if keeping Vettel happy was the sole consideration than why not give him a longer deal? It's because they are not entirely confident of his performance. A bit like Mercedes with Bottas. If Kimi doesn't perform, he'll be out. As will Bottas at Mercedes.

You don't know that Mercedes would not sign a tier 1 driver because there wasn't one available, I personally believe that if Vettel wanted to go to Mercedes next year then they would sign him, one of the clinches is with him being a German 4 time WDC, this being much the same reasoning behind signing Schumacher in 2010.

Again with Kimi he didn't perform in either 2014 or 2015 yet Ferrari re-signed him, also part of the reasoning behind the 1 year contracts for Kimi might also be his age, this is a policy that football clubs also tend to operate with older players.

And yet you do know that Ferrari wouldn't? I sense a double standard here.

There's nothing to suggest that Ferrari and McLaren are operating a different driver policy. Both have a "main" driver, and both have a solid 2nd.

Ferrari have history of not doing this as witnessed by employing the likes of Massa and Kimi, if Mercedes re-sign Bottas after being dominated by Hamilton then you will have a point.

As regards the comparison with Vandoorne, the point is simply that if two races are too early to judge him on, then why are they enough to condemn Kimi?

I'm not sure most have just the two races in mind Zoue. More likely his entire stint at Ferrari, which is into its fourth season now. 2014 and 2015 were weak for him, 2017 is starting out weak, and 2016...

Well as for 2016, I'm a Vettel fan but I don't think last year was Vettel at his best, and he had quite a bit of mechanical and strategical gremlins too. All in all last year I don't think Kimi was necessarily good but Vettel not as good as in 2015 or currently or Alonso in 2014.

You'll get no argument from me about Vettel being better. But 2016 wasn't a bad stint, or else Kimi wouldn't have been extended in the first place. This year he's had two lacklustre performances, which IMO both stem from setup issues. He absolutely needs to get on top of that but it's way too early to conclude he's past it from the small sample we've had so far

BIB: not sure why you say that, 2014 and 2015 were pretty bad for him as well and he got an extension?

Trying to remember now but I don't think 2015 was terrible, just that his qualifying was and he ended up having to play catch up most Sundays. His race performances weren't bad on the whole and I seem to recall that they felt if they could address his Saturday issues he'd do better. Which he did, as it turned out.

I'm reasonably sure 2014 was a two year deal?

Even when he started beating Vettel in qualifying in the second half of the 2016 season, Vettel was still beating him in the races.[/quote]

multiple times because ferrari bodged his strategy. they tried to bodge vettels as well but unlike kimi, he didnt trust the team to make the right call, stayed out and ended up getting an advantage in the end.

ferrari just dont seem to understand tyre usage and track position. they dont seem to be able to adapt to how the race is unfolding. its as though they come up with what they think is the ideal strategy and thats it. put the blindfolds on during the race. this is going back basically to when brawn left. they have been awful since then. but have been particularly bad recently

You'll get no argument from me about Vettel being better. But 2016 wasn't a bad stint, or else Kimi wouldn't have been extended in the first place. This year he's had two lacklustre performances, which IMO both stem from setup issues. He absolutely needs to get on top of that but it's way too early to conclude he's past it from the small sample we've had so far

BIB: not sure why you say that, 2014 and 2015 were pretty bad for him as well and he got an extension?

Trying to remember now but I don't think 2015 was terrible, just that his qualifying was and he ended up having to play catch up most Sundays. His race performances weren't bad on the whole and I seem to recall that they felt if they could address his Saturday issues he'd do better. Which he did, as it turned out.

I'm reasonably sure 2014 was a two year deal?

Even when he started beating Vettel in qualifying in the second half of the 2016 season, Vettel was still beating him in the races.

Yep, because Vettel's better? Did you miss the post above where I said - and I quote - "You'll get no argument from me about Vettel being better." That doesn't mean that Kimi was bad.

Just pointing all we hear is if Kimi could just do this better, if Kimi could just do that better but it all comes round to the same thing with him being the weakest driver in the top 3 teams which he was in 2016.

Here's a wild thought. Imagine Kimi's performance remains this bad or worse as the season progresses and it really starts to hurt Ferrari in both championships. Do you think they would go to Giovanassi? Lol I can't imagine that but it would be quite dramatic wouldn't it?

BIB: not sure why you say that, 2014 and 2015 were pretty bad for him as well and he got an extension?

Trying to remember now but I don't think 2015 was terrible, just that his qualifying was and he ended up having to play catch up most Sundays. His race performances weren't bad on the whole and I seem to recall that they felt if they could address his Saturday issues he'd do better. Which he did, as it turned out.

I'm reasonably sure 2014 was a two year deal?

Even when he started beating Vettel in qualifying in the second half of the 2016 season, Vettel was still beating him in the races.

Yep, because Vettel's better? Did you miss the post above where I said - and I quote - "You'll get no argument from me about Vettel being better." That doesn't mean that Kimi was bad.

Just pointing all we hear is if Kimi could just do this better, if Kimi could just do that better but it all comes round to the same thing with him being the weakest driver in the top 3 teams which he was in 2016.

I think most of the arguments are simply saying Kimi needs to do better, not "do this" or "do that." No-one's arguing that he's doing fine, so pretty unclear what you're trying to say here. The point I'm making is simply that calling for his head after two races is knee-jerk.

Trying to remember now but I don't think 2015 was terrible, just that his qualifying was and he ended up having to play catch up most Sundays. His race performances weren't bad on the whole and I seem to recall that they felt if they could address his Saturday issues he'd do better. Which he did, as it turned out.

I'm reasonably sure 2014 was a two year deal?

Even when he started beating Vettel in qualifying in the second half of the 2016 season, Vettel was still beating him in the races.

Yep, because Vettel's better? Did you miss the post above where I said - and I quote - "You'll get no argument from me about Vettel being better." That doesn't mean that Kimi was bad.

Just pointing all we hear is if Kimi could just do this better, if Kimi could just do that better but it all comes round to the same thing with him being the weakest driver in the top 3 teams which he was in 2016.

I think most of the arguments are simply saying Kimi needs to do better, not "do this" or "do that." No-one's arguing that he's doing fine, so pretty unclear what you're trying to say here. The point I'm making is simply that calling for his head after two races is knee-jerk.

I think that some have been thinking this for awhile and his recent performances just reaffirm this, also going forward from this we hear how these new cars seem to be more challenging for the drivers and widening the differences between the drivers, sorting the men from the boys sort of thing, I would be a bit concerned that maybe the new cars are showing Kimi up as well, maybe he hasn't aged well?

Even when he started beating Vettel in qualifying in the second half of the 2016 season, Vettel was still beating him in the races.

Yep, because Vettel's better? Did you miss the post above where I said - and I quote - "You'll get no argument from me about Vettel being better." That doesn't mean that Kimi was bad.

Just pointing all we hear is if Kimi could just do this better, if Kimi could just do that better but it all comes round to the same thing with him being the weakest driver in the top 3 teams which he was in 2016.

I think most of the arguments are simply saying Kimi needs to do better, not "do this" or "do that." No-one's arguing that he's doing fine, so pretty unclear what you're trying to say here. The point I'm making is simply that calling for his head after two races is knee-jerk.

I think that some have been thinking this for awhile and his recent performances just reaffirm this, also going forward from this we hear how these new cars seem to be more challenging for the drivers and widening the differences between the drivers, sorting the men from the boys sort of thing, I would be a bit concerned that maybe the new cars are showing Kimi up as well, maybe he hasn't aged well?

Here's a wild thought. Imagine Kimi's performance remains this bad or worse as the season progresses and it really starts to hurt Ferrari in both championships. Do you think they would go to Giovanassi? Lol I can't imagine that but it would be quite dramatic wouldn't it?

After how he performed in China I would give that a big NO.

I doubt it anyway as Ferrari don't like to be seen to make wrong decisions and this would mean they chose badly with both drivers. Keeping Kimi and lending Gio

Zoue, are you aware Vandoorne is not driving the same specification engine Alonso is? McLaren are trying to hang on to Alonso, and quite rightly so. Vandoorne's time will come.

Thank's for clearing that up for me, one thing I dislike about these claims of Alonso being the best driver is these advantages that are given to him within the teams, something he wasn't allowed in 2007.

except I don't think that's true. EB said Alonso had a different spec in Australia, but it wasn't PU-related. In fact he went out of his way to say there was no advantage and they were trying different things, which makes sense given how they are effectively running the races as test sessions anyway. If he's had a genuine advantage now then someone's going to have to provide some evidence, I'm afraid.

As far as I know..

Oz.Alonso had new front wing and bargeboards and Stoff didn't. Supposedly worth 3ths.

BahrainVandoorne had revised Turbo and MGU-H and Alonso didn't. Couple of kph on the traps but hard to be sure that's entirely due to that. Also saw some suggestion it helped with gear shifts as the noise was said to be clearly different between the cars with Alonso's sounding as rough as Melbourne..

Thanks for posting this - that fits with what I thought, which is that Alonso had the better aero parts in Melbourne, but not in Shanghai anymore. If anything, the newer engine would in principle have given Vandoorne a slight advantage (until it failed, of course!).

To paraphrase pokermean, one thing I dislike is when people try to find an excuse of favoritism for any time Alonso performs better than his teammates.

I wish Kimi would realize he's probably not going to improve in his performance and go out on his own terms. I count myself as a fan as well, but it's frustrating to watch him go backwards. Unless something changes drastically this season, I'd wager Ferrari is going to replace him. I don't see that happening so it'd be nice to see him sent off gracefully.

I wish Kimi would realize he's probably not going to improve in his performance and go out on his own terms. I count myself as a fan as well, but it's frustrating to watch him go backwards. Unless something changes drastically this season, I'd wager Ferrari is going to replace him. I don't see that happening so it'd be nice to see him sent off gracefully.

I see no reason to believe his performances can't improve.

There's nothing new here. He couldn't get the car set up the way he liked it in Australia and then in China this was exacerbated by the lack of Free Practice. Both times the car wasn't set up the way he needed it to be and when that happens he's frankly rubbish at coping. The low temperatures didn't help, either. But if he gets it set up right in Bahrain then don't be surprised to see him keeping up with the others.

The problem's not Kimi being slow, or that he's "lost" it. The problem is, and has always been, that he has a tolerance window of around 0.05% and anything outside that means he can't cope. Inside that, he's fine. But he's just crap at adapting

As regards the comparison with Vandoorne, the point is simply that if two races are too early to judge him on, then why are they enough to condemn Kimi?

I'm not sure most have just the two races in mind Zoue. More likely his entire stint at Ferrari, which is into its fourth season now. 2014 and 2015 were weak for him, 2017 is starting out weak, and 2016...

Well as for 2016, I'm a Vettel fan but I don't think last year was Vettel at his best, and he had quite a bit of mechanical and strategical gremlins too. All in all last year I don't think Kimi was necessarily good but Vettel not as good as in 2015 or currently or Alonso in 2014.

Yes, the reason people are saying that it's time for Kimi to retire isn't because these two races have been so terrible - it's because they've been completely in keeping with his form since 2014. The only way I would have said he should keep going is if this new formula had actually revitalized him like we'd all been hoping for. Setup issues or not, it clearly hasn't done so.

Since 2014, he has beaten his Ferrari teammate a grand total of eight times. Of those eight:

2016, Singapore: Vettel started from the back, still finished right behind.2016, UK: Beat Vettel on merit. 2016, Spain: Got lucky with the better strategy, but otherwise beat Vettel on merit. 2015, Abu Dhabi: Vettel started from the back, still finished right behind.2015, Belgium: Shouldn't count - Vettel beat him, but had a car failure and still got classified. 2015, Canada: Vettel started from the back, still finished right behind.2015, Bahrain: Beat Vettel on merit. 2014, Belgium: Alonso got a penalty for unsafe team actions, but Kimi probably beat him on merit anyway.

That's four times out of three years that he beat his teammate in a straight fight without the other driver starting way down the grid due to a technical issue. That shouldn't be good enough for anyone, and it's certainly not good enough for a world champion. I really wish this year had brought a return to form, but there just aren't any indications it's done so - and his form for the last three years simply hasn't been good enough to justify staying in a top team.

As regards the comparison with Vandoorne, the point is simply that if two races are too early to judge him on, then why are they enough to condemn Kimi?

I'm not sure most have just the two races in mind Zoue. More likely his entire stint at Ferrari, which is into its fourth season now. 2014 and 2015 were weak for him, 2017 is starting out weak, and 2016...

Well as for 2016, I'm a Vettel fan but I don't think last year was Vettel at his best, and he had quite a bit of mechanical and strategical gremlins too. All in all last year I don't think Kimi was necessarily good but Vettel not as good as in 2015 or currently or Alonso in 2014.

Yes, the reason people are saying that it's time for Kimi to retire isn't because these two races have been so terrible - it's because they've been completely in keeping with his form since 2014. The only way I would have said he should keep going is if this new formula had actually revitalized him like we'd all been hoping for. Setup issues or not, it clearly hasn't done so.

Since 2014, he has beaten his Ferrari teammate a grand total of eight times. Of those eight:

2016, Singapore: Vettel started from the back, still finished right behind.2016, UK: Beat Vettel on merit. 2016, Spain: Got lucky with the better strategy, but otherwise beat Vettel on merit. 2015, Abu Dhabi: Vettel started from the back, still finished right behind.2015, Belgium: Shouldn't count - Vettel beat him, but had a car failure and still got classified. 2015, Canada: Vettel started from the back, still finished right behind.2015, Bahrain: Beat Vettel on merit. 2014, Belgium: Alonso got a penalty for unsafe team actions, but Kimi probably beat him on merit anyway.

That's four times out of three years that he beat his teammate in a straight fight without the other driver starting way down the grid due to a technical issue. That shouldn't be good enough for anyone, and it's certainly not good enough for a world champion. I really wish this year had brought a return to form, but there just aren't any indications it's done so - and his form for the last three years simply hasn't been good enough to justify staying in a top team.

And really it has become very difficult for me to imagine that he wasn't equally poor at Lotus before that. His teammate was Grosjean and I think he was flattered by having a middle-of-the-grid-level driver in the other car. Still he actually lost out to Ro-Gro in qualifying. I think that car was actually really fast; perhaps even the best car of 2012 and certainly second best car of 2013.

To me Raikkonen has always been overrated and ever since he won the championship back in 2007, he has done nothing but decline in terms of his performance. Don't forget that Massa had firmly established the upper hand in the matchup by the time Kimi left for WRC for a couple of years.

As some have said, the Ice Cream wanna be jokes are so overused now that people need to realize it. Time to put them to rest.

When a driver is hurting in a race, for whatever reason, bad day at the wheel, bad set up, lack of power, the only fall back the driver has is strategy. In China I saw Kimi get stuck behind a car, and that seems to be happening a lot to him, he needs to push the issue, thats on him. Two races now where he is just being dropped by the front runners, he needs to sort that out, is it car or driver? Only he knows that.

Now when the guy driving a F1 car, dealing the track, other drivers, all these car settings on the steering wheel, still has more sense of how the race is developing than the team, the first thing I will question is the team strategy. He looked worse due to strategy, he gets a podium even when complaining about the car and maybe this thread does not come to be, rather "What a great recovery on a slow Ferrari".

Yes Kimi needs to get on the game, but its just the second race, and Ferrari carries some of the blame.

Too early to ask for his head. Do think this might be the year when he leaves F1

I wish Kimi would realize he's probably not going to improve in his performance and go out on his own terms. I count myself as a fan as well, but it's frustrating to watch him go backwards. Unless something changes drastically this season, I'd wager Ferrari is going to replace him. I don't see that happening so it'd be nice to see him sent off gracefully.

I see no reason to believe his performances can't improve.

There's nothing new here. He couldn't get the car set up the way he liked it in Australia and then in China this was exacerbated by the lack of Free Practice. Both times the car wasn't set up the way he needed it to be and when that happens he's frankly rubbish at coping. The low temperatures didn't help, either. But if he gets it set up right in Bahrain then don't be surprised to see him keeping up with the others.

The problem's not Kimi being slow, or that he's "lost" it. The problem is, and has always been, that he has a tolerance window of around 0.05% and anything outside that means he can't cope. Inside that, he's fine. But he's just crap at adapting

I really wish he was better at working with adverse conditions and I agree that we can expect him to do better in Bahrain in warmer temperatures and he's gotten great results there during his 2nd stint.

But Exediron's point pretty much says it all. Granted he's been paired with possibly the 2 best drivers in F1 so I can only fault him so much but he just hasn't gotten the results. Whatever the reason, I rather him move on to something else than watch him struggle, plus I tend to favor moves (barring accident/injury, of course) that create opportunities for new drivers.

I still enjoy watching for the most part, even if I wish he'd try to work more through less than ideal conditions.

Zoue, are you aware Vandoorne is not driving the same specification engine Alonso is? McLaren are trying to hang on to Alonso, and quite rightly so. Vandoorne's time will come.

Thank's for clearing that up for me, one thing I dislike about these claims of Alonso being the best driver is these advantages that are given to him within the teams, something he wasn't allowed in 2007.

except I don't think that's true. EB said Alonso had a different spec in Australia, but it wasn't PU-related. In fact he went out of his way to say there was no advantage and they were trying different things, which makes sense given how they are effectively running the races as test sessions anyway. If he's had a genuine advantage now then someone's going to have to provide some evidence, I'm afraid.

As far as I know..

Oz.Alonso had new front wing and bargeboards and Stoff didn't. Supposedly worth 3ths.

BahrainVandoorne had revised Turbo and MGU-H and Alonso didn't. Couple of kph on the traps but hard to be sure that's entirely due to that. Also saw some suggestion it helped with gear shifts as the noise was said to be clearly different between the cars with Alonso's sounding as rough as Melbourne..

Thanks for posting this - that fits with what I thought, which is that Alonso had the better aero parts in Melbourne, but not in Shanghai anymore. If anything, the newer engine would in principle have given Vandoorne a slight advantage (until it failed, of course!).

To paraphrase pokermean, one thing I dislike is when people try to find an excuse of favoritism for any time Alonso performs better than his teammates.

Well who to believe when somebody says one thing then somebody else says something different?

I wish Kimi would realize he's probably not going to improve in his performance and go out on his own terms. I count myself as a fan as well, but it's frustrating to watch him go backwards. Unless something changes drastically this season, I'd wager Ferrari is going to replace him. I don't see that happening so it'd be nice to see him sent off gracefully.

I see no reason to believe his performances can't improve.

There's nothing new here. He couldn't get the car set up the way he liked it in Australia and then in China this was exacerbated by the lack of Free Practice. Both times the car wasn't set up the way he needed it to be and when that happens he's frankly rubbish at coping. The low temperatures didn't help, either. But if he gets it set up right in Bahrain then don't be surprised to see him keeping up with the others.

The problem's not Kimi being slow, or that he's "lost" it. The problem is, and has always been, that he has a tolerance window of around 0.05% and anything outside that means he can't cope. Inside that, he's fine. But he's just crap at adapting

I ask you what is the true performance, the few races were he looks good or the majority were he looks second rate?

Some of the names being thrown around in this thread as potential replacements for Kimi just make me laugh... Perez, Wehrlein... It seems people have good memory only when it comes to Kimi's worst.

Back on topic, there's only one driver I could see Ferrari replacing Kimi with: Nico Hulkenberg. He's due a competitive drive already. Most of the others would not do any better than Kimi, especially considering he's been able to trouble Vettel on occasion. There are also a few drivers Vettel wouldn't like to be partnered with, and Ferrari would certainly not re-hire Alonso either.

In current F1 there's only one truly promising WDC contestant: Max Verstappen. I'm looking at the drivers list for the 2017 season and I seriously can't see anyone who would be better than Kimi, especially if you factor in that Vettel is supposed to be elite driver and the major threat to current best driver Hamilton. Losing to him when you're past your best is, therefore, no shame. If Kimi is able to outqualify Vettel in one season, he's doing better than Barrichello ever did against Schumacher, for example.

I think Ferrari will have to start considering replacing Kimi soon, as his salary is high and he's almost 40 years old, but it'll be difficult to find youngsters happy to play second fiddle to Vettel. Even the veteran Berger didn't want to be the second driver to Schumacher after having been just that to Senna, and Irvine knew he wasn't as good as Schumacher and had that carefree attitude, so when Ferrari approached him with a proposal, he just said "why not?" and got on with it.

I would've liked to see Bianchi in that second Ferrari, but it wasn't meant to be.

_________________

"Ask any racer, any real racer... It don't matter if you win by an inch or a mile. Winning is winning." (Dominic Toretto, "The Fast and The Furious")

Unless he can get to grips with the understeer he has had in the first two races he is gone. Hell he might be gone anyway if Vettel stays and Ferrari rehires Alonso next year. This year his poor adaptability is going to count adversely and very publicly because Ferrari arguably have the best car and so there is no hiding place for him. Only in 2016 did Kimi look at his fast and comfortable best but one year out of four is not a good ROI for Ferrari for his expensive services. He already knows he is fighting for his seat next year against some very capable contenders by his very vocal frustration in the cockpit when faced with adversity. Alonso is basically using this season as a year long interview for his next job also displaying new found diplomacy and politeness 😉. I would be very surprised if he is not in a Mercedes or Ferrari next year.

Thanks for posting this - that fits with what I thought, which is that Alonso had the better aero parts in Melbourne, but not in Shanghai anymore. If anything, the newer engine would in principle have given Vandoorne a slight advantage (until it failed, of course!).

To paraphrase pokermean, one thing I dislike is when people try to find an excuse of favoritism for any time Alonso performs better than his teammates.

Well who to believe when somebody says one thing then somebody else says something different?

I tend to believe the one that has a source - or in this case, I tend not to believe the one that doesn't. McLaren was quite open that Vandoorne had a different specification of car in Australia, so if the same was true in China why would they hide it?